On Thursday 19 June 2003 02:06 pm, Marcel Pol wrote: > On Thu, 19 Jun 2003 12:30:48 -0400 > > It's not clearly written in the cookerdevel page or in the cookerfaq, true. > The message does come by on the mailinglist regularly though. > It is written on those pages that you should search the archive first, > before reporting, and some days ago it was mentioned that you need to > upgrade bonobo and orbit, otherwise gnome will break. So you could have > known :-) (evolution is a gnome package). > > > I found using urpmi to be much more effective for installing since it > > grabs my deps also (except for this time ;-) > > Yes, but it can't grab every dependency. Sometimes things just break, like > when a package is rebuilt with a new compiler (happened with gcc2 => gcc3 a > lot). The maintainer of the package would need to set this manually, which > will become unmaintainable very soon. > Also, when using a mix of older and newer packages, it becomes very hard to > determine what still works and what doesn't. There are millions of possible > installs then. You can't test all these possibilities. When you follow the > rule to run a stable release like 9.1, or to run full cooker, the number of > possible installs becomes a lot smaller. I'm not sure if I wrote that in > understandable words :-) > > -- > Marcel Pol
Thank you Marcel, you not only wrote that in understandable terms which make a TON of sense, but you used gentle words too. Since this machine is not a production machine, I think I am going to go for the all cooker box. I want to thank you once again for making it understandable without giving me a 'cooker spanking' ;-) Amy A.
